What Is Our Strategy on the Cyprus Issue?


U.N peacekeepers wearing a face masks to protect against the spread of coronavirus, enter the Greek Cypriot area, south, from the U.N buffer zone as in the background is seen a Turkish military guard post with Turkish, left, and Turkish Cypriots breakaway flags, and a Cypriot guard post in the left, with Greek, right, and Cyprus flags, at the old town of divided capital Nicosia, Cyprus, Friday, April 9, 2021. (AP Photo/Petros Karadjias)

47 years after Turkey’s illegal invasion we have reached the brink of an even greater catastrophe. Instead of taking back what the Turks conquered, instead of reuniting Cyprus, the ‘solution’ we are facing is the so-called ‘two-state’ solution, and even worse.


I'm not the only one who has been sounding the alarm for a long time now.


It is being said, fairly openly, by relevant people, and even by the veteran negotiator Andreas Mavrogiannis, who warns us by uttering – even at this late date – a cry of despair that is really heartbreaking.


"If something is not done 'yesterday,' very soon it will be too late for Famagusta, for our occupied areas, and for the solution of the Cyprus problem," he says, adding that, "what is happening is dramatic," and that this "is perhaps the final phase of the complete destruction of the prospects for a solution and the reunification of the place."


It really is heartbreaking. But it is also something more. Unless brave decisions are taken immediately on our part, if the international community and Hellenism as a whole are not mobilized, there is no limit to where the Turks will go.


They will do everything they can to be able to control the whole island, by hook or by crook.

It was clear long ago that this was and is Erdogan's strategy, which he implements boldly, consistently and resolutely. And that's because he can. Because he plays alone. Uncontrolled.


If someone said five years ago that Famagusta would be in danger, it would have been considered absurdly pessimistic.


If someone said that the Turks had as their ultimate goal the creation of two states – controlling one completely, but also exercising, at least indirectly, control over the Greek state too – I too would have thought it was absurd.


And yet, these things are happening before our eyes. The aforementioned statements are those of the Greek Cypriot negotiator, who certainly has a complete picture of the situation.


Under these circumstances and in order to avoid "complete destruction" one would expect that Hellenism would be mobilized. That giant demonstrations would take place first in Nicosia, but also in Athens, London, New York, Melbourne, Toronto, and elsewhere.


And yet, none of this is happening. But if it happened somewhere, i.e. in Nicosia, then it would happen in other places.


The question is, why isn’t anything happening? Why aren’t people assembling?

And while it is easy to blame “them,” and to say that “they” don’t care – this is not entirely true.


The world is mobilized when a national strategy is created to rally world public opinion and, of course, Hellenism.


People mobilize when they realize that there is a serious struggle for national rights from which they cannot be absent.


This was our experience with the Cyprus problem in the first phase of the invasion and during the occupation, and has been the case for many years.

This is also our experience with the conflict with Skopje.


In the first case, the leaders of Cyprus failed to rise to the occasion and seek a realistic solution, not 100% of national claims and what international law says, but at least a solution that protects the Hellenism of Cyprus, like the late Nikos Rolandis used to say.


And as for Skopje, the possible comments I can make abound.


But can we accept "complete destruction" – according to the negotiator – with our arms folded across our chests?


Can we, with the experience of the past, allow the fatalistic continuing of these events as they are without our participation?


I would say, and I believe you would also say: No! Such a thing would lead to an even worse catastrophe, it would lead to other national catastrophes that, among other things, will afflict the nation for many decades to come.